Discussion on MQL4 documentation - page 10
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
But some people don't want to understand that, turn off their heads, plant the slogan "The customer is always right" on the flag and declare literally the following:
Understand that if people find it hard to understand without a textbook, it is your problem and yours alone
It's about the same as saying to the law of gravity "Understand, it's bad for people to move around, that's your problem! Why don't you get it?" By the way, how would you feel about becoming a physicist in one book and better in 3 hours, 7 days tops?Who is ready to contribute to the expansion of the documentation?
One of the first articles on the website:Example of creating an Expert Advisor
The article, of course, is a bit outdated, but it allows to understand the structure of a simple Expert Advisor.
One of the first articles on the website:Example of creating an Expert Advisor
The article is, of course, a bit outdated, but it allows you to understand the structure of a simple Expert Advisor.
In general, people get used to good things very quickly, and the process of "jamming" inevitably begins, irrespective of the current state of affairs. It happens everywhere in society. People just need a kind of constant struggle and the achievement of goals, however ephemeral, which do not change anything in principle. Otherwise, as one of my acquaintances (a millionaire, by the way) said, it simply becomes uninteresting to live ;o).
My experience and knowledge is enough to consciously explain to people that programming is a complicated thing and no amount of theory (learn a language in 3 hours!) will make you a programmer. But some people don't want to understand this, turn off their heads, hang the slogan "The customer is always right"...
There is a magazine for young IT enthusiasts: "Hacker". Sometimes they can manage to show a reader on one spread the basics of a language (for example, PHP, ASP or Object Pascal) and show how one can write a simple program. One cannot say after this article that one knows PHP, but one has a certain base. He can write a ready-made program, and change it and improve it as his knowledge grows. A person mastering a programming language doesn't need anything else to start with.
There is a game called Colobot where you can control robots in C. Learning the language is based on very simple and uncomplicated tasks, and in just a few missions, the player learns all the C syntax, general programming principles, and more.
All in all, I don't agree with you.
In addition, there is a well-founded opinion that product creators (programmers) cannot objectively evaluate the results of their work. As they see the system from their programmer's point of view. Therefore, if you are a programmer and creator of MT 4 and MQL, we are speaking different languages with you. Western software companies have long engaged third-party companies and experts to study consumer needs for a product and objectively evaluate its usability and functionality. It is not for me to teach you, of course, but I just want you to understand my point of view.
I mean, I'm all for common sense, a conscious approach to programming (programming is hard), factual material (no need for empty or obfuscated accusations) and no whining about not wanting to understand (yes, it is hard).
Nothing personal - this is without courteous reverence and to the point.
You are right that there is enough documentation in principle to sort it out in the end. But why not make it easier for newbies to get the hang of it? On the basis of some simple textbook on C one can write his own textbook, just clarifying the syntax, removing unnecessary and adding the necessary functions and examples?
Yurixx, please point out the actual error. What you cited is not even remotely an error.
The description you gave in the helpline is perfectly normal and clear.
Well, if what I've written isn't enough ... Go ahead.
1. The meaning of the range_index variable and its connection to the measurement number is described incomprehensibly (not to say incomprehensibly).
2. The result of the given sample is missing, which makes it impossible to understand what the described function does. Generally, the output of the example results is the best way to understand this example and hence the documentation article. Therefore, this output should be present wherever possible.
3. The data in the example is such that even with the output of the results, it is not possible to understand the meaning of the function being described.
All these are actual (though not "explicit") documentation errors. Note that when the programmer uses reserved language words incorrectly, the program does not work. And when the documentation writer cannot express his/her idea correctly in the language he/she is writing the documentation in, it still works but much worse.
Then the programmer, while debugging the program, modifies it accordingly. But documentation users are in a worse situation. They, of course, also fine-tune their understanding of the language in the process of discussion with its creator, but, alas, they cannot force him to make the documentation complete. And if he thinks "It's OK, they'll figure it out after all. So what if it's hard? They will figure it out", then the situation is a dead end.
How much time and effort is wasted on both sides as a result !!!
I would also like to mention a couple of facts in my defence.
There is a magazine for young IT enthusiasts called "Hacker". Sometimes this magazine manages to show a reader on one spread the basics of a language (for instance, PHP, ASP or Object Pascal) and show how one can write a simple program. One cannot say after this article that one knows PHP, but one has a certain base. He can write a ready-made program, and change it and improve it as his knowledge grows. A person mastering a programming language doesn't need anything else to start with.
There is a game called Colobot where you can control robots in C. Learning the language is based on very simple and uncomplicated tasks, and in just a few missions, the player learns all the C syntax, general programming principles, and even more.
All in all, I don't agree with you.
In addition, there is a well-founded opinion that product creators (programmers) cannot objectively evaluate the results of their work. Because they see the system from their programmer's point of view. Therefore, if you are a programmer and creator of MT 4 and MQL, we are speaking different languages with you. Western software companies have long engaged third-party companies and experts to study consumer needs for a product and objectively evaluate its usability and functionality. It is not for me to teach you, of course, but I just want you to understand my point of view.
You are right that the documentation is, in principle, sufficient to get the hang of it eventually. But why not make it easier for newbies to get the hang of it? Can we write our own textbook on the basis of some simple C textbook, just clarifying syntax, removing unnecessary and adding necessary functions and examples?
By the way, "write your own textbook on the basis of some simple C textbook, just refining its syntax, removing unnecessary and adding necessary functions and examples" is called stealing.
Normally an index is a variable that numbers the elements of an array. In this case it is not an index, but an index number. However, from the phrase "Since indexes start from zero, the dimension size is 1 more than the largest index. " neither this nor anything else can be understood. Especially to a beginner.
But in criticism we need to stick to the factual material and not to devolve into "universal/idealistic" claims.